Sunday project: update xUnit conditional test execution #16014
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Member
So you want the tests to potentially fail more? Refers to: test/EFCore.SqlServer.FunctionalTests/TestUtilities/TestEnvironment.cs:28 in 399e618. [](commit_id = 399e618, deletion_comment = False) |
smitpatel
reviewed
Jun 10, 2019
test/EFCore.Relational.Tests/Utilities/DbParameterCollectionExtensionsTest.cs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Member
Member
Contributor
Author
|
Re:
|
Contributor
Author
|
@AndriySvyryd It could be a static method--isn't that true for any extension method? What's the reason you're suggesting this? |
399e618 to
17eec52
Compare
Member
|
It seems to only be useful for these implementations so we can avoid having it popup in any referencing projects. |
Contributor
Author
|
@AndriySvyryd That's reasonable. Will do. |
AndriySvyryd
approved these changes
Jun 10, 2019
The main changes here are: * Fix attributes that were pointing at non-existent classes * Move conditional check execution to when the tests are running, rather than as part of discovery. This is for two reasons: * Code execution during discovery to, for example, attempt to connect to a database is not ideal. Discovery runs in the background and hence discovery code shouldn't do expensive or fragile things. * Test runners are free to discover tests without those tests having been built. For example, some test runners do discovery based on an AST. The xUnit metadata model handles this, but only if code doesn't attempt to use actual types when it shouldn't. * Be as close to the way xUnit natively works. In other words, remove as much test execution logic as possible and extend only when really necessary. Assembly level condition attributes are problematic for this, since they should apply to all tests in the assembly. That means that all tests need to be `ConditionalFact` or `ConditionalTheory`. This allows every test to determine if it should run, even if it's only disabled at the assembly level. Tested with: * Command-line runner * VS runner * Another one
17eec52 to
ed5a4c6
Compare
ajcvickers
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 3, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The main changes here are:
Assembly level condition attributes are problematic for this, since they should apply to all tests in the assembly. That means that all tests need to be
ConditionalFactorConditionalTheory. This allows every test to determine if it should run, even if it's only disabled at the assembly level.Tested with: